A total of 214 subjects were enrolled at the three investigational centers. The final sample for evaluation of the primary aim included 148 subjects (21 normal and 127 AMD). The attrition rate was high because there was no formal screening visit. Forty-four subjects were excluded because their retinal health did not meet the eligibility criteria. Additional causes of attrition included 14 subjects with invalid dark adaptation measurements because of high fixation error rates, three subjects with unreadable fundus photograph sets, and five subjects who were withdrawn because they could not complete the protocol (e.g., the study eye could not be dilated to ≥6 mm).
Participant characteristics are listed in
Table 1. The AMD group was on average 8 years older than the normal group (
P = 0.0001). The two groups had similar sex and racial distributions (
P = 0.37,
P = 0.26). The normal group had slightly better than 20/20 visual acuity in the study eye, compared with slightly worse than 20/25 for the AMD group (
P < 0.0001). Based upon fundus grading, the AMD group consisted of 41 subjects with early AMD, 72 subjects with intermediate AMD, and 14 subjects with advanced AMD.
Dark adaptation curves in response to a moderate bleaching intensity often lack features produced by a high bleaching intensity, such as the exponential cone sensitivity recovery, cone plateau, or a distinct rod–cone break. For the bleaching intensity used in this study, most normal subjects exhibited a linear sensitivity recovery, lacking distinct cone-mediated features (
Fig. 1A). Subjects with early and intermediate AMD typically exhibited a cone plateau and rod–cone break (
Figs. 1B,
1C). These features are apparent because of the large delay of rod-mediated sensitivity recovery. Subjects with advanced AMD often exhibit minimal or no rod recovery for 20 minutes (
Fig. 1D). For the rapid test (6.5-minute maximum duration), the trend was for the rod intercept to increase with increasing disease severity (
P < 0.0001;
Table 2). The AMD group exhibited a 1-minute larger rod intercept than the normal group (
P < 0.0001). Most of the rod intercepts for the AMD subjects were artificially limited to the maximum test duration of 6.5 minutes, limiting the ability of the rapid test to differentiate by disease severity. To assess whether aging affected dark adaptation speed, the mean rod intercept of normal adults older than 65 years was compared with that of younger normal adults. There was no effect of aging on the rod intercept, which suggests that aging is not a confounding factor for this protocol (mean difference = 0.6 minutes,
P = 0.32). For the extended test (20-minute maximum duration), the rod intercept again increased with increased disease severity (
P < 0.0001). The dark adaptation impairment measured for the AMD group was substantial. The mean rod intercept of the AMD group was 10 minutes greater than that of the normal group (
P < 0.0001). For the typical AMD subject no rod recovery is exhibited at the time when most normal subjects have completed recovery (
Figs. 2A, 2B).
The primary aim of the study was to estimate the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the AdaptDx rapid test. Sensitivity was defined as the percentage of AMD subjects who exhibited a rod intercept > 6.5 minutes. Specificity was defined as the percentage of normal subjects who exhibited a rod intercept ≤ 6.5 minutes. Diagnostic test sensitivity was calculated to be 90.6% (115/127, P < 0.001). The 95% CI for diagnostic sensitivity had a lower bound of 85.1% and an upper bound of 100%. Diagnostic test specificity was calculated to be 90.5% (19/21, P = 0.0271). The 95% CI for diagnostic specificity had a lower bound of 72.9% and an upper bound of 100%.
The AdaptDx measured normal dark adaptation in 12 confirmed AMD cases. To evaluate whether these false-negative cases were associated with a specific AMD phenotype, diagnostic sensitivity was calculated for each severity of AMD. The diagnostic sensitivities were 80.5% (33/41) for early AMD, 94.4% (68/72) for intermediate AMD, and 100% (14/14) for advanced AMD. The AdaptDx measured abnormal dark adaptation in two confirmed normal cases. The rod intercepts of the two false-positive cases were well beyond the diagnostic cut point of 6.5 minutes (7.7 and 7.8 minutes). Reviewing the subjects' medical histories found no likely causes for the abnormal dark adaptation. However, the magnitudes of the rod intercepts indicate some condition other than normal retinal health.
The secondary aim of the study was to assess whether the AdaptDx extended test could differentiate between early and intermediate AMD. The association between AMD severity and rod intercept was evaluated by using logistical regression on the extended test data. There was a positive relationship between the rod intercept and disease severity. The odds ratio for intermediate AMD versus early AMD was 1.19 (95% CI: 1.044–1.2, P = 0.0015). In other words, for every 1-minute increase in the rod intercept the odds of a subject having intermediate AMD increased 11.9%.
The dark adaptation results were similar across sites. To evaluate poolability, the sensitivity and specificity of the rapid test were evaluated between Penn State (N = 99) and the combined data from MEEI (N = 45) and Wilmer (N = 4). Diagnostic sensitivity at Penn State was 90.9% compared with 89.7% for MEEI/Wilmer. Diagnostic specificity at Penn State was 100% compared with 80% at MEEI/Wilmer. Both false positives in the overall data set were participants at MEEI, which accounts for the difference in specificity values between the sites.